Re: [gentoo-catalyst] [PATCH 1/5] embedded: remove actions that are broken by default

[Brian Dolbec]

On Thu, 21 May 2020 13:41:18 -0700
Matt Turner <mattst88@g.o> wrote:

> On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 10:34 AM Daniel Cordero
> <gentoo.catalyst@××××.ws> wrote:
> >
> > From: Daniel Cordero <catalyst@××××.io>
> >
> > dir_setup() doesn't exist, bootloader() exists but requires specific
> > tools to be installed in the seed stage and doesn't check that they
> > are, causing the build to fail.
> > ---
> > If I have misconstrued the purpose of bootloader, then documentation
> > needs to be written.
>
> I don't actually see any documentation about
> >  catalyst/targets/embedded.py | 2 --
> >  1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/catalyst/targets/embedded.py
> > b/catalyst/targets/embedded.py index aa23f5b3..1b4ad9d6 100644
> > --- a/catalyst/targets/embedded.py
> > +++ b/catalyst/targets/embedded.py
> > @@ -41,7 +41,6 @@ class embedded(StageBase):
> >
> >      def set_action_sequence(self):
> >          self.settings['action_sequence'] = [
> > -            "dir_setup",
>
> Nice. This function was removed in 2005, so the embedded target has
> been broken ever since. That certainly answers my question as to
> whether anyone uses it.
>
> Fixes: 1dafb5fa06d2 (Add locking support. ...)
>
> So, you must use the embedded target. Could you tell me how you use
> it, for what device, etc?
>
> >              "unpack",
> >              "config_profile_link",
> >              "setup_confdir",
> > @@ -51,7 +50,6 @@ class embedded(StageBase):
> >              "setup_environment",
> >              "build_kernel",
> >              "build_packages",
> > -            "bootloader",
>
> It's not obvious to me what specific tools this requires to be
> installed in the seed stage. Presumably you're referring to this?
>
> cmd([self.settings['controller_file'], 'bootloader',
> self.settings['target_path'].rstrip('/')]
>
> which eventually runs bootloader-setup.sh.
>
> I'd assume it's generally sensible to install a bootloader in the
> embedded target, and I don't think we have mechanism for customizing
> the action_sequence, so if we remove bootloader from the list then I
> think the python bootloader() function is just dead code, isn't it? I
> doubt that's the end result we want.
>


No, if you notice, this is removing the bootloader action sequence only
for the embedded target.  Each target subclasses stagebase, so can
override what is defined in stagebase as needed.  Customizing the
action_sequence is something that pretty much all the targets do.